Hi John,
all Linux kernel code is licenced under the GPLv2.0, and maybe only
be used by derived works if that work is available under a
GPL-compatible license. the _GPL export are just a very strong hint
that it's almost impossible not to be derived work - using non-trivial
inline functions
Hi John,
all Linux kernel code is licenced under the GPLv2.0, and maybe only
be used by derived works if that work is available under a
GPL-compatible license. the _GPL export are just a very strong hint
that it's almost impossible not to be derived work - using non-trivial
inline functions
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:25:49AM -0800, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: John Hubbard
>
> Originally, kref_get and kref_put were available as
> standard routines that even non-GPL device drivers
> could use.
As I stated in my response to the 0/1 of this patch, this
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:25:49AM -0800, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
> From: John Hubbard
>
> Originally, kref_get and kref_put were available as
> standard routines that even non-GPL device drivers
> could use.
As I stated in my response to the 0/1 of this patch, this sentence is
not true,
On 03/08/2017 01:50 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:25:49AM -0800, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
From: John Hubbard
Originally, kref_get and kref_put were available as
standard routines that even non-GPL device drivers
could use.
As I stated
On 03/08/2017 01:50 AM, Greg Kroah-Hartman wrote:
On Wed, Mar 08, 2017 at 01:25:49AM -0800, john.hubb...@gmail.com wrote:
From: John Hubbard
Originally, kref_get and kref_put were available as
standard routines that even non-GPL device drivers
could use.
As I stated in my response to the
6 matches
Mail list logo